China military stresses Party control in face of 'liberal' enemies

[gambit]

In China, CCP could be seen to be equivalent to the government, the nation.
Your example do not apply to China.
There is no artificial division like Republican and Democrat in China.
Therefore an engineer working for the government or CCP, would not be biased against anyone because there is no division.

Yes, there is.

The CCP made it next to impossible for an alternative political party to compete at the national level, so either you are in the CCP, or you are not. The civil engineer analogy still applies. He can favor Party members for faster and higher quality services and products over non-Party members.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Keep dreaming.



CCP is indeed factional to certain extent. Everyone in the government has to do lip service to communism, socialism. Also, many kind of ideas are simply excluded from the CCP.

list some of those ideas.

 

[Jlaw]

To the indian guy who is obsessed with China I worry more about India. Your GDP is lower Vietnam and many african countries. Only 10% of the people live "decent" in india while the 90% suffer.

 

[Huan]

Yes, there is.

The CCP made it next to impossible for an alternative political party to compete at the national level, so either you are in the CCP, or you are not. The civil engineer analogy still applies. He can favor Party members for faster and higher quality services and products over non-Party members.

Where did you hear about giving better service than for non-party members? That is quite an exaggeration.

 

[xunzi]

"We chose to allow the CCP"

Hence, when you chose CCP to step down, it will step down, right?

Yes, if the CCP are not doing a good job managing the country, protecting our national integrity and property, they will go down just like any regime.

 

[JSCh]

Yes, there is.

The CCP made it next to impossible for an alternative political party to compete at the national level, so either you are in the CCP, or you are not. The civil engineer analogy still applies. He can favor Party members for faster and higher quality services and products over non-Party members.

Well, I can tell you that doesn't happen in China. Most people would not know or care if the person they met are party member.

Party membership do not really give you much privilege, and it also carry with it some restriction. i.e. you would be expected to do more and scrutinize and discipline under party rule. Not everybody would choose or want to be a party member.

 

[Huan]

Well, I can tell you that doesn't happen in China. Most people would not know or care if the person they met are party member.

Party membership do not really give you much privilege, and it also carry with it some restriction. i.e. you would be expected to do more and scrutinize and discipline under party rule. Not everybody would choose or want to be a party member.

A majority of Chinese citizens are not official communist party members I think.

 

[Zsari]

This blurring of the line between partisan ideology and government is politically dangerous.

A 'party' is a human organization with transparent, meaning obvious, ideological and political motivations for all to see. A 'government' is and should be an apolitical structure containing the necessary mechanisms to maintain order in the country. Those mechanisms are institutions like the police departments, the legislature, the judicial system, the regulations that outlines who and how to build roads or inspect food or fixing the sewer system, etc. And the military is a member of this supposedly apolitical structure.

The word 'professional' is problematic for those who have never served in the military. In one perspective, a 'professional' is one who offers his skills to what the highest bidder. There is nothing dishonorable about this. But when it comes to national defense, a truly professional military is one that is apolitical and takes orders from the government, not the political party that is in control of the government.

Example: A civil engineer maybe a Republican in partisan politics, but as long as he is employed by the government as a civil engineer, his actions should be dictated by the laws of physics, not by the ideas that are espoused by the Republican Party. The government said the traffic lights in a neighborhood needs upgrades to compensate for increased population. If the civil engineer decide to do a poor job because the demographics of that neighborhood is largely Democrats, the civil engineer is in violation of the ethics of his profession and of the moral responsibilities he bears as to serve all citizens regardless of ideological credo.

The issue here is that the PLA have no philosophical directive to serve the Chinese people but to be a political enforcement arm of the Chinese Communist Party, which is 'communist' only in name, not in practice. At any time at the party's whims, the PLA could and will act like that Republican civil engineer who endangers lives just because he does not like Democrats in the neighborhood. The Chinese members here do not see this as ANY form of corruption, but those in the West who grew up with continuous reinforcement of the separation of partisan ideology from governmental institutions that are apparently designed to serve all citizens regardless of partisan affiliations, this is corruption of the worst kind.

One is so entrenched in party politics that he forgot for most of human history, governance has been delivered without any political party. Party more often than not serves the interest of the individuals within the political body against the interest of the state much like what unions are. The ideal governance is one without any political party, one without any ideological constraints, where leadership governs based on their own judgment with only the interest of the state on their mind.

 

[Huan]

One is so entrenched in party politics that he forgot for most of human history, governance has been delivered without any political party. Party more often than not serves the interest of the individuals within the political body against the interest of the state much like what unions are. The ideal governance is one without any political party, one without any ideological constraints, where leadership governs based on their own judgment with only the interest of the state on their mind.

Like a running body of university faculty and deans?

 

[Zsari]

Like a running body of university faculty and deans?

Or most enterprises.

 

[gambit]

One is so entrenched in party politics that he forgot for most of human history, governance has been delivered without any political party. Party more often than not serves the interest of the individuals within the political body against the interest of the state much like what unions are. The ideal governance is one without any political party, one without any ideological constraints, where leadership governs based on their own judgment with only the interest of the state on their mind.

Yes...You are pining for the mythical 'benevolent dictator'.

 

[Huan]

Or most enterprises.

Oh you mean like a business corporation.

 

[Zsari]

Yes...You are pining for the mythical 'benevolent dictator'.

Where you have the competition between 2 or more parties, you can have a competition between any amount of individuals. As long as the seats are not hereditary and open to competition, the difference is only in names. And like I said before, a country would be in much better hands with leaders that are more capable, more calculating, even more conniving than having a benevolent one, and that there are many examples throughout the Chinese history.